Astus wrote:Saying that what the Buddha and Dogen taught are not what they believed and realised is saying that they were speaking lies.

Just to be clear, I am challenging the claim that we can know what the Buddha and Dogen believed based on what they taught.

The Buddha taught different things to different people depending on their needs and understanding. Sometimes his teachings were contradictory. Was he lying to some and not to others, or was he exercising skillful means in each case?

In actuality, Dharmagoat does not believe that the Buddha and Dogen did not believe in rebirth, just like Simon E. Even though there are written records on some web forums that claimed they said that, we do not know for sure if they really thought that way. If fact, both of them are probably true traditionists and fully accept the dependent origination teachings where beings are reborn in accordance with their ripened karma.

E ma ho!

If you believe certain words, you believe their hidden arguments. When you believe something is right or wrong, true of false, you believe the assumptions in the words which express the arguments. Such assumptions are often full of holes, but remain most precious to the convinced.

I have it on the very best authority that Simon E. does not, and has never, existed.Simon E. is a dream figure who is dreaming that he has created a cyberperson with whom he identifies for reasons of convention.

" My heart's in the Highlands my heart is not here.My heart's in the Highlandschasing the deer."

Simon E. wrote:I have it on the very best authority that Simon E. does not, and has never, existed.Simon E. is a dream figure who is dreaming that he has created a cyberperson with whom he identifies for reasons of convention.

dharmagoat wrote:Just to be clear, I am challenging the claim that we can know what the Buddha and Dogen believed based on what they taught.

The Buddha taught different things to different people depending on their needs and understanding. Sometimes his teachings were contradictory. Was he lying to some and not to others, or was he exercising skillful means in each case?

Skilful means doesn't mean it is not true, but that it is not the final teaching. The path is a gradual one, so one should not stop on level one. And just because there are further levels, the higher ones don't invalidate the lowers, but rather give them context and further meaning. Also, if the Buddha spoke anything that was not true, he failed to uphold the basic precepts, and that is impossible.

So the original question remains. Can we know what the Buddha believed based on what he taught?

If all teachings but the final teaching lack context and are limited in meaning, can they be used to gauge what the Buddha actually believed?What is the final teaching, and does anyone fully understand it?

I get the feeling that most of the people replying on this thread are not soto zen practitioners, if they were I'm not sure they'd be such a defensive stance over literal re-birth.I think I may stick to Zen forum international. This site doesn't seem to be helpful to my Zen practice.

dharmagoat wrote:If all teachings but the final teaching lack context and are limited in meaning, can they be used to gauge what the Buddha actually believed?What is the final teaching, and does anyone fully understand it?

If he spent all his teaching career of about fifty years teaching that rebirth is real and must be overcome, then we can safely assume he actually believed in it.

dharmagoat wrote:If all teachings but the final teaching lack context and are limited in meaning, can they be used to gauge what the Buddha actually believed?What is the final teaching, and does anyone fully understand it?

If he spent all his teaching career of about fifty years teaching that rebirth is real and must be overcome, then we can safely assume he actually believed in it.

dharmagoat wrote:If all teachings but the final teaching lack context and are limited in meaning, can they be used to gauge what the Buddha actually believed?What is the final teaching, and does anyone fully understand it?

If he spent all his teaching career of about fifty years teaching that rebirth is real and must be overcome, then we can safely assume he actually believed in it.

dharmagoat wrote:So the original question remains. Can we know what the Buddha believed based on what he taught?

If all teachings but the final teaching lack context and are limited in meaning, can they be used to gauge what the Buddha actually believed?What is the final teaching, and does anyone fully understand it?

The teaching is confirmed by proper reasoning and personal insight, the tradition of that is preserved by the community of the noble beings, the third jewel of Buddhism.

1Myriad dharmas are only mind. Mind is unobtainable. What is there to seek?2If the Buddha-Nature is seen,there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.3Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.4With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,the six paramitas and myriad meansare complete within that essence.

dharmagoat wrote:So the original question remains. Can we know what the Buddha believed based on what he taught?

If all teachings but the final teaching lack context and are limited in meaning, can they be used to gauge what the Buddha actually believed?What is the final teaching, and does anyone fully understand it?

The teaching is confirmed by proper reasoning and personal insight, the tradition of that is preserved by the community of the noble beings, the third jewel of Buddhism

The community of noble beings preserve the understanding of the final teaching of the Buddha, and are therefore the ones that know what the Buddha actually believed?

dharmagoat wrote:The community of noble beings preserve the understanding of the final teaching of the Buddha, and are therefore the ones that know what the Buddha actually believed?

The buddha-nature, the eye of awakening, is present in all, but only those who have actually opened it realise the way things truly are. And that is the correct faith of a buddha.

1Myriad dharmas are only mind. Mind is unobtainable. What is there to seek?2If the Buddha-Nature is seen,there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.3Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.4With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,the six paramitas and myriad meansare complete within that essence.

Whether or not Buddha taught rebirth, I don't care. Whether or not Buddha believed in rebirth, I don't care, and if that means I have a "wrong view" I still don't care. I believe in my own experience, and I'm pretty sure Buddha taught this above anything else.I share the sentiments of the Zen master who said 'I'm not a Dead Zen master' when asked about what happens after we die. I also share the sentiments of some Zen teachers who say that just because Buddha "Attained" enlightenment, that didn't mean he was some perfect, super human, infallible person like a lot of Buddhists seem to think. To even suggest that would put Buddha on a plateau of a God.

"If you see the Buddha, kill the Buddha"

"In the begginers mind there are many possibilities, in the experts mind there are few."